Our lawless legislature has lost yet another case in court, this time over the Elected Officials Retirement Plan (specifically retired judges). This is the second time in recent years that the Arizona Supreme Court has struck down as unconstitutional attempt by Tea-Publicans in the Arizona legislature to reduce benefits to retirees of public employee pension plans. I am sure the editorial board of the Arizona Republic will have a sad over this ruling.

The justices said a voter-approved section of the state constitution makes public pension plans a contractual relationship. More to the point, that provision says benefits “shall not be diminished or impaired.”

Justice Robert Brutinel, writing for the unanimous court said that language applies not just to what retired judges were getting at any one time. He said it also means lawmakers cannot tinker with already existing formulas that determine how much those benefits will increase each year.

Thursday’s ruling puts a damper on efforts by legislators to sharply restrain the obligations of the state to finance existing public pensions. But it does not bar lawmakers from setting new rules for those who have not yet become judges.

Judges are members of the Elected Officials Retirement Plan.

* * *

In 2011, though, lawmakers, with the blessing of Gov. Jan Brewer, enacted a formula for calculating benefits that resulted in just a 2.47 percent benefit increase that year and no increases in 2012 and 2013. And that same law contains other calculations which could constrain future benefit increases to less than 4 percent.

Several retired judges sued. When a trial judge sided with them, the state sought Supreme Court review.

Comments

Our lawless legislature has lost yet another case in court, this time over the Elected Officials Retirement Plan (specifically retired judges). This is the second time in recent years that the Arizona Supreme Court has struck down as unconstitutional attempt by Tea-Publicans in the Arizona legislature to reduce benefits to retirees of public employee pension plans. I am sure the editorial board of the Arizona Republic will have a sad over this ruling.

The justices said a voter-approved section of the state constitution makes public pension plans a contractual relationship. More to the point, that provision says benefits “shall not be diminished or impaired.”

Justice Robert Brutinel, writing for the unanimous court said that language applies not just to what retired judges were getting at any one time. He said it also means lawmakers cannot tinker with already existing formulas that determine how much those benefits will increase each year.

Thursday’s ruling puts a damper on efforts by legislators to sharply restrain the obligations of the state to finance existing public pensions. But it does not bar lawmakers from setting new rules for those who have not yet become judges.

Tip Jar

Mo Udall says, "I have learned the difference between a cactus and a caucus. On a cactus, the pricks are on the outside." Donate to BlogForArizona to help us keep an eye on the pricks inside the GOP caucuses controlling Arizona's politics. Or you could buy some of our keen swag."
Please consider making a monthly pledge:

Things We Love

Fair Use Info

Please link to this site. Deep linking as well as landing page links are encouraged and appreciated. Here are site graphics you can use for graphic links.

BforAZ Merchandise:

Purchase of goods via or donations to this site do not constitute a donation to any political candidate or party and are not tax deductible. This site is run by volunteers and is not authorized by any political campaign, party, or PAC.

Opinions expressed are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the opinions or positions of any other organization, entity, or officials.